The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1887-07-10
A stupid Calumny.

A Stupid Calumny.
A writer in the North American Rcvie,o for
July discusses Irish Aid in the Revolution"
In O spirit worthy Of Massachusetts Mug
wumpery, Of true-blue Toryism, or. indeed
OF downright ACKNOWLEDGMENT. For the
chief characteristic Of the Mugwump Is to
assume complete knowledge when he pos
sesses less than half; to breathe spirit Of
disdain and superoilious superiority which
was the vitality OF Toryism during and after
the Revolution; and 1t Is the essence Of
Know Nottingham to belle the merits Of and
suppress the truth about those whom 1t Is
pleased to deneminste foreigners as the
best means Of expressing contempt for them.
All this is In the short but vicious essay on
"Irish Aid In tho American Revolution"
The writer asserts that the Irish "cannot
point to q single name like LAFAYETTE,
KosCusKo, PULASKI, or STEUBKN: but there
was CONWAY" and there was "CoNwAY's
Cabal." He quotes from BANCROFT. whose
treatment Of this portion Of history is In
adequate and misleading, both as to the
Irish In the American army and in relation
to tho sympathy Of the people Of Ireland
with the Revolution. He even puts GRATTAN
In the attitude OF hostility!
There are happily for truth, many sources
Of information on this question Of which Mr.
BANCROFT did not avail himself. There is,
for instance. the report Of the Committee Of
tho House Of Commons printed in 1885, and
to be found In the British Museum, although
rare outside Of 1t. EDMUND BURKE was a
member Of the committee whose duty was
to inquire into the conduct Of the American
war. Among the witnesses was Major-Gen.
RoBHRTsoN, who had served In America
twenty-four years. He should have known,
therefore, whether any assertion about
WAsHNGToN's army was likely to be sub
stantially true. He swore that Gen. LEE In
formed him that half the patriot army were
from Ireland" Even in the troops that came
with LAFAYETTE will be found the names Of
well-known Irishmen. The staff itself in
cluded refugees from Ireland, who were glad
to get a whack at their ancient enemy.
As to names to match any In the annals Of
the war, who else but Known Nothing eould
forget-all Hishmen or the sons Of Irishmen
ANTHONY WAYNE, KNOX, WAsH1NGToNs
Secretary Of War and the Navy; HAND,
WAsHNaToN's Adjutant-G General; STEPHEN
MoYLAN RICHARD BUTLER, the SULLIvANs.
one Of whom commanded the Northern
division; STARK, FITZGERALD, WASHING
TONS beloved aide-de-campr Who will VEN
ture to say that any man, native or Of for
eign birth, collapsed during the Revolutionary
strife the glory Of BARRY, the father Of our
navy2 The writer alludes to the legend that
the soldier who tried to poison WASHINGTON
was an Irishman, who did 1t for an English
bride. But he forgets to tells how Irish JACK
BARRY scorned the bribe with which Lord
HOWE tempted him. He forgets or does not
know that "CoNwAY's cabal" was so called
merely for ALTERATION; that CONWAY was an
insignificant member Of the Jealous clique
which included GATES, SCHUYLER, and LEE,
none Of them Irish; that CONWAY was be-
lieved, In the words Of SULLIVAN to WASH
NaToN Ito have been imprudently led into
1t" and that he wrote a manly apology to
WASHINGTON. What did the English LRK
and the English ARNOLD?
The services Of Irishmen In the Revolution
were not limited to the fighters. Warts not
successfully brought to an end by valor onlyj
money Is needed; and 1t was the Irish mer-
chants Of Philadelphia who, in 1850, when the
treasury was empty and the army in danger
half million dollars for the cause.
An Irishman, WILLIAM THOMPSON, was
Secretary Of the Continental Congress. JOHN
DUNLAP, printer to thei Convention In 1774
and to the first Congress, and the printer Of
the Declaration Of Independence. was an
Irishman. JOHN NIXON, who road that docu-
ment to Congress, was an Irishman. JOHN
BEyNs, an Irishman, issued at his own ex-
pense an engraving Of that document with
fae-similes of the signatures. Nine Of the
hgners were of Irish blood.
The anti-Irish commentators mentions that
q number Of Irish deserted. So they did; 30
did hundreds Of others Of all nationalities.
He finds Il inoonvenient. when mentioning
that Lord RAwpoN raised regiment OF
Irish, which has been denied, to mention
also tho fact that Connecticut regiment
mutinied In body and had to DO disciplined
by Pennsylvania troops.
As to the sympathy Of the Irish In ireland
with the Revolution, only phenomennlly ig-
norant writer would raise the question
against them. 1t was perfectly notorious.
AL that BANCROFT can cite Is iunkeyish
address presented to the King by Lord
KENnARB and dozen or 80 Of his ilk; and
ERoUDE who Ia no partisan OF the Irish, de-
clares that these noblemen and gentry did
not represent the Irish people, Their heirs
In title and Estates presented a jubilee adj
dress the other day to the Queen Some fu-
ture writer Of learning like this common
tator's will cite that as proof that the Irish
people went wild with Joy over the Queens
jubilee. 1t is true that troops were sent out
from Ireland during the Revolution. They
did not arrive In time to do any fighting;
they were subject to the orders Of the King
wherever they were stationed. and the &C.
ton Of the Government majority in the Irish
Parliament in merely consenting to send
them was not tho action Of the Irish people.
Only one-ninth of the Irish people were at
that time eligible to sit in Parliament-the
Anglicans, as we would say now; the Prot
estants, Us they wero called then. That
very incident furnished GRATrAN with the
opportunity to deliver one Of his most cele-
brated speeches of sympathy with and adj
Il